I hate to break it to all of you who think we changed the bible or that we don't read it...WE LOVE THE BIBLE. If you want to tell me it is not the same bible I challenge you to sit down and compare them. Guess what you will find.....The are the same. Well not the same as a NLT or NIV version but if you compare to KJ you will find it is the same. Yes that is right we use and read THE KING JAMES VERSION. why do we use only this Translation? well it is simple "We Believe the Bible to be the word of God as far as it is Translated Correctly..." This is straight from our Articles of Faith. We will get more into those in later posts but That is what I am using as my base for these discussions. Why do we say 'as far as it is translated correctly' well that is a common history lesson. From Wikipedia we get the following summary of the Bible:
The Bible refers to the sacred scriptures of Judaism and Christianity, usually compiled in a single volume. The Hebrew Bible of Judaism contains 39 books. The Christian Bible adds to the Hebrew Bible 27 New Testament books, and particularly in the Catholic and Orthodox traditions, some additional Old Testament books, giving a total of between 66 and 77 books.
The Christian Bible is divided in two, roughly in a two-third to one-third proportion. Christians call the first two thirds, mostly inherited from the Jews, the Old Testament and the last third, considered written by themselves, the New Testament. The Roman Catholic and Eastern Orthodox versions of the Old Testament are slightly larger because of their acceptance and inclusion of certain texts considered apocryphal by Protestants. Considering only the "Old Testament", the Jewish canon and Christian canon differ considerably more than the Protestant and Roman Catholic arrangements differ.
This summary of the Bible alone points out why there may be issues in translation. It is also very important to remember that the Bible was not written as one book. It is a compilation.
Again back to Wikipedia for the easiest summary:
Soon after the establishment of Christianity in the first century, Church fathers compiled Gospel accounts and letters of apostles into a Christian Bible which became known as the New Testament. The Old and New Testaments together are commonly referred to as "The Holy Bible". The canonical composition of the Jewish Bible is in dispute between Christian groups: Protestants hold only the books of the Hebrew Bible to be canonical; Roman Catholics and Eastern Orthodox additionally consider the deuterocanonical books, a group of Jewish books, to be canonical. The New Testament is composed of the Gospels ("good news"), the Acts of the Apostles, the Epistles (letters), and the Book of Revelation.
The differences in the Old Testament are varied from different Orthodox Churches and is a prime illustration that things are missing or changed for modern scripture use. I will say here that whoever edited the Wikipedia page did a fabulous job in keeping a level non argumentive thought processes regarding the Bible and that is why I reference it so many times.
A number of books which are part of the Peshitta or Greek Septuagint but are not found in the Hebrew (Rabbinic) Bible are often referred to as deuterocanonical books by Roman Catholics referring to a later secondary (i.e. deutero) canon. Most Protestants term these books as apocrypha. Evangelicals and those of the Modern Protestant traditions do not accept the deuterocanonical books as canonical, although Protestant Bibles included them in Apocrypha sections until around the 1820s. However, the Roman Catholic and Eastern Orthodox Churches include these books as part of their Old Testament.
The Roman Catholic Church recognizes:
- Tobit
- Judith
- 1 Maccabees
- 2 Maccabees
- Wisdom of Solomon
- Sirach also called Ecclesiasticus
- Baruch
- The Letter of Jeremiah (Baruch Chapter 6)
- Greek Additions to Esther
- The Prayer of Azariah and Song of the Three Holy Children
- Susanna
- Bel and the Dragon
Some other Eastern Orthodox Churches include:
- 2 Esdras i.e., Latin Esdras in the Russian and Georgian Bibles
The Anglican Churches uses some of the Apocryphal books liturgically. Therefore, editions of the Bible intended for use in the Anglican Church include the Deuterocanonical books accepted by the Catholic Church, plus 1 Esdras, 2 Esdras and the Prayer of Manasseh, which were in the Vulgate appendix.
The New Testament is a collection of 27 books, of 4 different genres of Christian literature (Gospels, one account of the Acts of the Apostles, Epistles and an Apocalypse). Jesus is its central figure. The New Testament presupposes the inspiration of the Old (2 Timothy 3:16). Nearly all Christians recognize the New Testament (as stated below) as canonical scripture.
The New Testament is also edited and changed based on the different Sects.However the majority of the changes in regards to the New Testament are omissions that were considered and voted out as the Bible was compiled.
Now looking back at what we discussed does it make more sense why we say 'as far as it is translated correctly'. History has skewed and lost many of the truths that were revealed or written. And if you try the argument of Well God has the power over what is included or not...I hate to break it to you but God being who he his gives his children the ability to make their own choices. And in a time where their were no Prophets who would have know what god wanted.
Now as far as the Book of Mormon is Concerned. The Front cover states "Another Testament of Jesus Christ" not a replacement but another Testament. It is the recordings and testimonies of the people from the American Continent. Jesus stated that he had other sheep and we know he ministered to them that is all in the Bible. So why would it not make sense that those sheep were here on the American Continent. We know from the Old Testament that people fled Jerusalem because of the influence of Evil and that Righteous people were guided to safety and better lives. The Book of Mormon follows one of those families to the America's and tells the story of their descendants. Including the story of Christ visiting them after his Resurrection.We know from history that a White god was worshiped in the America's, We also know that they built temples and that they have several similarity in their cuneiform to ancient Hebrew so How hard is it to think that the Book of Mormon is what it says it is. You can say Joseph Smith made it up or that he was a brilliant novelist but the fact of the matter is he did not have the education to make something like the Book of Mormon up. I challenge each of you to pick up a copy, the LDS church will mail one to you for free if you need. just visit
http://www.mormon.org/mormonorg/eng/ and select request a copy on the lower right side of the page. Take some time and read the book. I recommend that you start in 3 Nephi. Don't forget to Pull out your Bible while you read the are great references in the bottom of the pages to link you back to the Bible teachings.
But on the Short Don't tell me I don't read the same Bible or that I think the Bible is not important. I study my Bible everyday and I know a great deal about the verses and the history. Can you truly say that? and if you can great. but how many Christians can?
No comments:
Post a Comment